Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 4,174
Windows 7 is a great os. There is no way of knowing that w8 will be as good.
Wait for windows 8
- Thread starter anuraj
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,492
- Location
- Northern Ireland
I agree, Vista pre SP1 was like Win 7.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 9,007
- Location
- Kent
I agree, Vista pre SP1 was like Win 7.
errr....yes /sarcasm
In what way? You actualy think Vista after sp1 is better than Windows 7?
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,492
- Location
- Northern Ireland
It was SP1 that killed off Vista, but Vista pre SP1 was good. I'll even go to say that Win 7 pre SP1 and Vista were the same.
Windows 7 is good enough for now and will be supported for a heck of a long time anyway, personally I wouldn't wait for Windows 8 although I don't think it's going to be late 2012 when it comes out, I expect it'll be on shelves within 12 months as part of Microsoft's evolving plan to shorten the time between OS releases in the same way Apple have been doing for years. I think we'll be seeing less Service Packs in the future and more "new" MS operating systems.
Isn't it just the same but with a few more features and tweaks? Don't think its new ground up, so should be fine.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 8,542
- Location
- Glocestershire
The general patern with MS operating systems is they release a substantal upgrade that isn't quite there yet (think 95, Vista, 2000 [remembering how bad it was before SP2]). They then tend to hit the back of the net a couple of years later, with their improved version (98, 7, XP).
If Windows 8 is going to be groundbreaking, then it's probably best to wait for Windows 9. If it's a slight tarting up of 7 then it's probably not worth the bother, any one remember Windows ME?
My guess is the later, with MS wanting to push for more freqent upgrades. Bare in mind this isn't unusual. OSX is upgraded every year, ubuntu twice a year. XP must be by far the longest lived OS on the desktop.
If Windows 8 is going to be groundbreaking, then it's probably best to wait for Windows 9. If it's a slight tarting up of 7 then it's probably not worth the bother, any one remember Windows ME?
My guess is the later, with MS wanting to push for more freqent upgrades. Bare in mind this isn't unusual. OSX is upgraded every year, ubuntu twice a year. XP must be by far the longest lived OS on the desktop.
Last edited:
There will be ARM compatible versions undoubtedly
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 11,664
- Location
- Northampton
Windows 8 isn't a new OS from the ground up, it is based on 7 with UI tweaks and various new features so should be an improvement rather than a flop.
There are builds available already showing some of these new features etc
There are builds available already showing some of these new features etc
That's what every version of Windows after v1 has been
That's what every version of Windows after v1 has been
er, not really. Vista was basically a complete rebuild, it wasn't "evolved" from XP like XP was from 2000.
2000 evolved from NT4. Windows 1 evolved up to Windows ME and was then dumped because it sucked the balls.
Windows 7 is an evolution of Vista, but underwent considerable refinement to make it much much better than Vista, which i maintain was awful.
It really wasn't. It was based on the latest codebase at the time, which was Server 2003. A lot of new technologies were added, though.
Windows 7 is mainly fluff. Underneath, it's not really any different to Vista. I won't disagree that it's made it a lot more pleasant though!
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,492
- Location
- Northern Ireland
That's true, if you go to duel boot Vista and Win 7, Vista will always be the first boot option. Normally the latest OS, will always be first on the boot menu.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 9,007
- Location
- Kent
Agree completely with 1. and 3. but with point 2 (yes I've numbered them) Windows 1 evolved up to Windows 3.11 32s and then got replaced with Windows 95, which was a complete rebuild. Before 95 Windows wasn't even an operating system! (Try installing earlier versions of Windows without DOS installed first!)
And yes PhillyDee, Vista is a terrible resource hog, even with Superfetch disabled. Windows 7 on the same systems is very very quick.
You try installing Windows 95/98/Me without DOS installed first! Those OS's still have plenty of the 16-bit code from Win 3.11 in. Other than NT, I don't think Windows has ever had a complete rewrite.